Is this real verified science?

  • B
  • Thread starter hagar
  • Start date

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
20,737
4,442
Looks fine at first glance. Why do you ask?
 
  • #3
ohwilleke
Gold Member
1,486
384
Given that it cites to a reputatable peer reviewed journal article, probably yes.

A. B. Henriques et al, Ultrafast Light Switching of Ferromagnetism in EuSe, Physical Review Letters (2018). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.217203
 
Last edited:
  • #5
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,535
4,305
I wasn't sure about the source I received it from.
There are 3 things you need to do when you read something like this and want to make a first pass as evaluating it:

1. Check the publication source. This one was citing a publication in Phys. Rev. Lett. (they give you a link).

2. Then, go to our list of acceptable journals and see if Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the journals. This will tell you whether this is a respectable journal, or some fly-by-night-and-accepts-anything-under-the-sun journal. In physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the top 3 most-prestigious journals for physics papers (the other 2 being Nature and Science).

3. And this is a separate issue. The question on whether it is "verified science" is completely different than figuring out if it has been properly published. Verification of anything in physics often requires time. For an experimental result, it requires that other people reproduce the same experiment, and even go beyond that (such as increasing the accuracy and sensitivity of the experiment). Publishing it first in a reputable journal is the first step in an often tedious process of verification.

If you do not have access to the PRL paper itself, check out the ArXiv upload:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.05038

Zz.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
hagar
Gold Member
50
22
There are 3 things you need to do when you read something like this and want to make a first pass as evaluating it:

1. Check the publication source. This one was citing a publication in Phys. Rev. Lett. (they give you a link).

2. Then, go to our list of acceptable journals and see if Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the journals. This will tell you whether this is a respectable journal, or some fly-by-night-and-accepts-anything-under-the-sun journal. In physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. is one of the top 3 most-prestigious journals for physics papers (the other 2 being Nature and Science).

3. And this is a separate issue. The question on whether it is "verified science" is completely different than figuring out if it has been properly published. Verification of anything in physics often requires time. For an experimental result, it requires that other people reproduce the same experiment, and even go beyond that (such as increasing the accuracy and sensitivity of the experiment). Publishing it first in a reputable journal is the first step in an often tedious process of verification.

If you do not have access to the PRL paper itself, check out the ArXiv upload:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.05038

Zz.
Thank you for the info.
 

Related Threads on Is this real verified science?

Replies
3
Views
704
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
5K
Top